Bioadhesives are becoming an essential and important ingredient in medical science. Despite numerous reports, developing adhesive materials that combine strong adhesion, biocompatibility, and biodegradation remains a challenging task. Here, we present a biocompatible yet biodegradable block copolymer-based waterborne superglue that leads to an application of follicle-free hair transplantation. Our design strategy bridges self-assembled, temperature-sensitive block copolymer nanostructures with tannic acid as a sticky and biodegradable polyphenolic compound. The formulation further uniquely offers step-by-step increases in adhesion strength via heating-cooling cycles. Combining the modular design with the thermal treating process enhances the mechanical properties up to 5 orders of magnitude compared to the homopolymer formulation. This study opens a new direction in bioadhesive formulation strategies utilizing block copolymer nanotechnology for systematic and synergistic control of the material's properties.
Bioadhesives are becoming an essential and important ingredient in medical science. Despite numerous reports, developing adhesive materials that combine strong adhesion, biocompatibility, and biodegradation remains a challenging task. Here, we present a biocompatible yet biodegradable block copolymer-based waterborne superglue that leads to an application of follicle-free hair transplantation. Our design strategy bridges self-assembled, temperature-sensitive block copolymer nanostructures with tannic acid as a sticky and biodegradable polyphenolic compound. The formulation further uniquely offers step-by-step increases in adhesion strength via heating-cooling cycles. Combining the modular design with the thermal treating process enhances the mechanical properties up to 5 orders of magnitude compared to the homopolymer formulation. This study opens a new direction in bioadhesive formulation strategies utilizing block copolymer nanotechnology for systematic and synergistic control of the material's properties.
Medical adhesives are being extensively
investigated for diverse
applications such as wound healing, hemostasis, sealants after anastomosis,
and tissue engineering.[1,2] However, considerable challenges
remain in the development of medical adhesives to satisfy all of the
following three criteria: (1) high adhesion, (2) biocompatibility
showing a low level of acute and chronic inflammations, and (3) degradation
by hydrolysis. Despite numerous studies, no bioadhesives exhibiting
all three properties exist. Naturally found proteins such as fibrin
and collagen are biocompatible and degraded by enzymatic reactions,
but the weak tissue adhesions limit their applications in a wide range
of clinical settings.[2] In contrast, highly
adhesive synthetic glues based on polyurethane and polycyanoacrylate
suffer from toxicity that causes inflammatory immune responses.[3]Mussel- and plant-inspired phenolic or
phenolamine glues are appealing
alternatives to medical applications. They employ strong and versatile
interactions provided by the phenolic moieties such as catechol and
gallol (Figure a).
Medical adhesives possessing phenolic groups conjugated onto biopolymers
generally exhibit a reasonably low level of toxicity. Examples include
chitosan–catechol,[4,5] chitosan–gallol,
alginate–catechol,[6,7] glycol chitosan–catechol,[8] dextran–catechol,[9] and poly(ethylene glycol)–catechol.[10] These bioinspired adhesives largely vary in adhesion performance
depending on the types of backbone and the phenolic motif, as well
as the conjugation degree. For example, a gallol-conjugated polymer
exhibited about 7 times stronger adhesion than the catechol analogue
due to the tridentate cross-linking mechanism.[11] Their degradability, however, is typically low in vivo.
While synthetic vinyl polymer-based glues containing catechol pendants
have been also explored as functional adhesives,[12−15] low in vivo degradability of
the C–C main chain would also limit their medical applications.
Figure 1
Block
copolymer-reinforced biodegradable superglue. (a, b) Previously
studied classes of bioadhesives based on phenolic moieties. (a) Catechol-
and gallol-conjugated biopolymers. (b) Blend of synthetic water-soluble
polymers with polyphenols. Tannic acid (TA) is given as a representative
polyphenol, and the degradable ester linkage is shown in green. (c)
Blend of an amphiphilic diblock copolymer with TA in this study. PEO-b-PLA (OL) consisting of hydrophilic and temperature-sensitive
poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) and hydrophobic poly(lactic acid) (PLA)
was chosen as a biocompatible and biodegradable block copolymer. OL
micelles form in water driven by hydrophobic interaction and associate
with TA via hydrogen bonding of phenolic hydroxyl groups with PEO
corona to produce an OL/TA gel at a high concentration. Repeatedly
heating the gel close to the gel–sol transition and cooling
back to room temperature strengthens the material by reorganizing
the hydrogen-bonded network with the dehydration–rehydration
process of the PEO corona. (d–f) Photos of OL/TA and heat-treated
OL/TAQ compared to the blend of TA with the PEO homopolymer
(PEO/TA). G′ values obtained at ω =
10 rad s–1 and γ = 1% are shown within the
photos. Adhesion strength was demonstrated by dumbbell lifting for
15 s. (d) PEO/TA. (e) OL-M/TA, and (f) OL-M/TAQ.
Block
copolymer-reinforced biodegradable superglue. (a, b) Previously
studied classes of bioadhesives based on phenolic moieties. (a) Catechol-
and gallol-conjugated biopolymers. (b) Blend of synthetic water-soluble
polymers with polyphenols. Tannic acid (TA) is given as a representative
polyphenol, and the degradable ester linkage is shown in green. (c)
Blend of an amphiphilic diblock copolymer with TA in this study. PEO-b-PLA (OL) consisting of hydrophilic and temperature-sensitive
poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) and hydrophobic poly(lactic acid) (PLA)
was chosen as a biocompatible and biodegradable block copolymer. OL
micelles form in water driven by hydrophobic interaction and associate
with TA via hydrogen bonding of phenolic hydroxyl groups with PEO
corona to produce an OL/TA gel at a high concentration. Repeatedly
heating the gel close to the gel–sol transition and cooling
back to room temperature strengthens the material by reorganizing
the hydrogen-bonded network with the dehydration–rehydration
process of the PEO corona. (d–f) Photos of OL/TA and heat-treated
OL/TAQ compared to the blend of TA with the PEO homopolymer
(PEO/TA). G′ values obtained at ω =
10 rad s–1 and γ = 1% are shown within the
photos. Adhesion strength was demonstrated by dumbbell lifting for
15 s. (d) PEO/TA. (e) OL-M/TA, and (f) OL-M/TAQ.Another class is a blend of synthetic water-soluble
polymer with
polyphenols (Figure b).[16−22] Tannins, plant polyphenolic compounds such as tannic acid (TA),
can coagulate the polymer in water into a sticky viscoelastic liquid
via multiple hydrogen bonds.[23,24] We have previously
reported that poly(ethylene oxide) and poly(vinyl alcohol) can form
adhesives with TA.[16,21] Since TA is a hydrolyzable tannin
and also edible, biocompatibility and degradability can be achieved
by the choice of the polymer. However, improving adhesion properties
has been challenging because of the inherently low elastic modulus.To simultaneously address all three issues of strong adhesion,
suitable biocompatibility, and controllable biodegradation, we designed
a new adhesive formulation consisting of an amphiphilic, biodegradable,
and also biocompatible block copolymer and TA (Figure c). The key is to use poly(ethylene oxide)–poly(lactic
acid) diblock copolymer (PEO-b-PLA). Both PEO and
PLA are widely used biocompatible polymers approved by the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration (FDA), and PLA is a renowned bioplastic known
particularly for its hydrolytic susceptibility.[25−27] The block copolymer
self-assembles into micelles with a PLA core and a PEO corona in water
to avoid unfavorable exposure to the hydrophobic PLA and has also
been approved for clinical trials as a drug delivery vector.[28−30] In the presence of TA, the PEO corona containing oxygen atoms along
the chain interacts with TA to produce a three-dimensional micellar
network bridged by TA.[16] In contrast to
the TA–homopolymer complexes, the PLA core reinforces the water-swollen
network, resulting in a viscoelastic solid, a hydrogel with dramatically
increased mechanical properties. The TA–PEO interaction preserves
the necessary sticky nature of an adhesive.Herein, we demonstrate
the concept of a block copolymer–TA
superglue with a series of PEO-b-PLA. Simply mixing
aqueous solutions of PEO-b-PLA and TA produces a
sticky coacervate hydrogel with mechanical properties that can be
tuned by varying the composition (Figure c).Compared to the PEO/TA mixture,
the elastic modulus was enhanced
up to 3 orders of magnitude, producing a much tougher adhesive with
higher shear strength (Figure d,e). More importantly, we demonstrate that applying heating
cycles to the hydrogel can further increase the elastic modulus by
>200-fold (Figure f). The temperature-dependent PEO solubility enables this unique
hardening process through thermal cycles, via redistribution and densification
of the hydrogen-bonded network. The improved mechanical properties
are retained much longer with the block copolymer than PEO. The heat-treated
block copolymer-containing hydrogels exhibited superior adhesion performance,
allowing us to realize an unprecedented application of follicle-free
hair transplantation.
Results and Discussion
Preparation of OL/TA Glue
Three PEO-b-PLAs were prepared via ring-opening polymerization of d,l-lactide (LA) in the presence of methoxy-terminated PEO
with a number average molar mass of 20 kg mol–1 (for
characterization details, see the Supporting Information).[31] They were designated
OL-L, OL-M, and OL-H according to the PLA volume fraction (fPLA) of 6, 13, and 20%, respectively (Figure S1 and Table S1). They all form micelles
in water (Figure S2). In a typical adhesive
formulation, a 50 wt % aqueous solution of OL is mixed with a 50 wt
% TA solution. The TA solution volume is adjusted to be 5 mol % TA
relative to the PEO repeating units. Coacervates with a bright brown
color phase separate out of the solution and sink to the bottom of
the vessel (Figure f). A 1H NMR spectrum of OL-M in deuterated water shows
signals corresponding to PEO protons only, consistent with the formation
of micelles with a PEO corona and a PLA core (Figure S3). The addition of TA fully suppresses the PEO signal,
indicating a strong TA–PEO association. A shift in the C–O–C
stretching vibrational band to a lower wavenumber supports hydrogen
bonding of the TA hydroxyl groups with the ethereal oxygens in the
PEO (Figure S4).We probed the viscoelastic
behavior of OLs and their mixtures with TA (OL/TAs) by dynamic shear
measurements, compared to PEO as a reference (Figure ). At room temperature, 50 wt % aqueous solutions
of PEO and OL-L were liquid, showing very low storage moduli (G′), smaller than 10 Pa, and could not be accurately
measured (Figure S5). The OL-M and OL-H
solutions formed gels and did not flow. A plateau in G′ was observed, which was higher than the loss moduli (G″) over the entire investigated range of angular
frequency (ω), indicating that a network structure forms by
packing of the OL micelles, imparting the elastic response.
Figure 2
Mechanical
enhancement in OL/TAs compared to PEO/TA. (a–d)
Frequency sweep data of PEO/TA and OL/TA formed with the mixing ratio
of [EO]/[TA] = 20:1. (e, f) Change in dynamic moduli as a function
of fPLA (e) and [EO]/[TA] in OL-M/TA (f).
The moduli obtained at ω = 10 rad s–1 and
γ = 1% are presented. In (e), the [EO]/[TA] ratio is fixed as
20:1.
Mechanical
enhancement in OL/TAs compared to PEO/TA. (a–d)
Frequency sweep data of PEO/TA and OL/TA formed with the mixing ratio
of [EO]/[TA] = 20:1. (e, f) Change in dynamic moduli as a function
of fPLA (e) and [EO]/[TA] in OL-M/TA (f).
The moduli obtained at ω = 10 rad s–1 and
γ = 1% are presented. In (e), the [EO]/[TA] ratio is fixed as
20:1.TA increases the viscosity of the solution upon
addition. A power
law dependence of G″ ∼ ω is apparent
in the PEO/TA and OL-L/TA, while G′ does not
follow the ω2 scaling typically observed in a viscous
fluid (Figure a,b).
The slope of G′ and G″
becomes near 0.5 in the high-frequency regime. This is consistent
with the sticky Rouse model that describes associative polymer networks,
in this case, mediated by hydrogen bonding of the PEO with TA.[32,33]OL-M/TA and OL-H/TA behaved as a viscoelastic solid with an
increase
in G′ and G″ with
increasing frequency (Figure c,d). G′ also increased with the PLA
content, indicating that the PLA micellar core is isolated from the
PEO–TA network swollen in water. A 900 times higher G′ was observed in OL-H/TA compared to PEO/TA (Figure e). The stability
of the network was also enhanced by increasing the PLA fraction, as
evidenced by the crossover between G′ and G″ appearing at a higher strain in the amplitude
sweep (Figure S6).We also investigated
the effect of the amount of TA on the rheological
properties of OL-M/TA (Figures f and S7). Adding more TA increased G″ more strongly than G′
and collapsed the gel at a smaller strain, suggesting that the PEO–TA
network dominates the response at high TA loading. G′ showed a maximal value at a 5 mol % TA loading relative
to PEO repeating units ([EO]/[TA] = 20:1). This value coincides with
the previously reported optimal PEO:TA ratio, which showed the strongest
adhesion.[16] Above this ratio, the increased
number of unbound TA molecules may result in a decrease in G′ (Figure S7).
Heat-Treated Strengthening
The strength of the OL/TA
hydrogels was remarkably enhanced by heating–cooling cycles. Figure a shows the change
in moduli of the OL-H/TA upon heating to 85 °C and cooling back
to 25 °C (for the whole frequency sweep data, see Figure S8). At 85 °C, some water squeezes
out of the hydrogel and the phase-separated material behaves as a
liquid with a G′ of 30 Pa. Upon cooling to
room temperature, the gel state is quickly restored and the released
water is adsorbed back. Strikingly, G′ and G″ increased about 10-fold compared to the as-produced
gel without heating. Mechanical properties were further enhanced by
repeating the successive temperature cycles up to five times, resulting
in 100 times higher G′, on the order of 1
MPa. Simply cooling the heated gel in the air also gives the hardened
material, which is denoted OL-H/TAQ. This heat-treating
process is conceptually reminiscent of steel hardening by thermal
quenching.[34]
Figure 3
Heat-treated strengthening
of OL/TA. (a) G′
and G″ of OL-H/TA obtained at ω = 1
rad s–1 and γ = 0.1% over five heating–cooling
cycles. In each cycle, the temperature was increased to 85 °C
at a rate of 20 °C min–1 and maintained for
5 min. Then, the sample was cooled back to 25 °C and rested for
5 min. (b) Relaxation of OL-H/TAQ and PEO/TAQ over time probed by the change in G′ (filled
circle) and G″ (open circle) at ω =
1 rad s–1 and γ = 0.1%. (c) One-dimensional
small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) profiles of OL-H/TA upon heating
to 85 °C and cooling back to 25 °C. The proposed structural
transition including dehydration upon heating and redistribution of
the hydrogen bonds during cooling is schematically illustrated along
the SAXS data.
Heat-treated strengthening
of OL/TA. (a) G′
and G″ of OL-H/TA obtained at ω = 1
rad s–1 and γ = 0.1% over five heating–cooling
cycles. In each cycle, the temperature was increased to 85 °C
at a rate of 20 °C min–1 and maintained for
5 min. Then, the sample was cooled back to 25 °C and rested for
5 min. (b) Relaxation of OL-H/TAQ and PEO/TAQ over time probed by the change in G′ (filled
circle) and G″ (open circle) at ω =
1 rad s–1 and γ = 0.1%. (c) One-dimensional
small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) profiles of OL-H/TA upon heating
to 85 °C and cooling back to 25 °C. The proposed structural
transition including dehydration upon heating and redistribution of
the hydrogen bonds during cooling is schematically illustrated along
the SAXS data.The heat-treated strengthening was also observed
for OL-M/TA and
even PEO/TA, indicating that the phenomenon is related to the PEO–TA
interaction (Figures S9 and S10). The change
was the most dramatic in PEO/TA, probably because of the higher PEO
fraction, and turned the material into a gel state with a G′ of >1 MPa. However, the improvements only lasted
temporarily in PEO/TAQ: the material quickly lost the moduli
and went back to liquid after approximately 2 h at room temperature
(Figure b). In contrast,
the OL-H/TAQ successfully sustained the increased moduli
in the gel state over a prolonged time. After 10 h, G′ was still higher than 0.4 MPa.We believe that the
heat-treated strengthening originates from
the temperature-dependent solubility of PEO in water. With increasing
temperature, the PEO chains are known to be relatively dehydrated
and become less soluble in aqueous environments.[35] A gel-to-sol transition is known to occur in aqueous solutions
of OL and related amphiphilic block copolymers as a function of the
polymer concentration and composition.[36] This is ascribed to an upper critical solution temperature, which
causes a breakdown in the micellar packing network by increased chain
mobility and reduced micellar volume. The temperature-dependent frequency
sweep data of both OL-M and OL-M/TA were consistent with a gel-to-sol
transition above 75 °C (Figure S11). The hydrogen bonding mediated by TA does not seem to largely alter
the transition temperature. We note this temperature is also above
the glass transition temperature of PLA (∼52 °C).[37]We probed changes in the micellar morphology
upon heating–cooling
by synchrotron small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) (Figures c and S12–S15). Distinct scattering features were discernable
in the OL aqueous solutions at room temperature, which were consistent
with disordered micellar packing in general (Figure S12). The addition of TA suppresses scattering intensities
considerably and can be attributed to the increased heterogeneity
in the micellar packing and also the decreased electronic density
contrast of the PLA core to the PEO/TA/water surrounding. Nonetheless,
a broad principal scattering peak could be discerned in the SAXS profile
of the as-prepared OL-H/TA responsible for micelle–micelle
correlations, with an average intermicellar spacing (d) of 31 nm (Figure c).The micellar network swells slightly, by 6%, in the presence
of
TA. Heating to 85 °C refined the scattering patterns of both
the OL-H and OL-H/TA, accompanied by higher-order scattering functions
(Figure S13). A strong increase in the
scattering intensity was particularly noticed from OL-H/TA. Improved
lateral ordering and a narrower interface in the micellar morphology
are indicative of the facilitated exchange of OL chains with increased
mobility in the sol state, even when TA is present (Figure S14). The slightly decreased spacing is also consistent
with a reduction in the micellar volume by the partial collapse of
the PEO corona (Figure S15). Interestingly,
the refined scattering features in OL-H/TA persist upon cooling to
room temperature, with a negligible change in d.
The temperature-dependent changes were not obvious in the SAXS data
of the other OL/TAs with lower PLA fractions because of weak scattering
intensities (Figure S13).The temporary
mechanical enhancement of PEO/TA after the temperature
cycle suggests that PEO prefers to associate with TA during rehydration,
and this increases the effective density of the hydrogen bonds. The
resulting transient network would relax quickly at room temperature
by the hydration-driven redistribution of TA and the PEO chains. Since
the glassy PLA core hinders the rearrangement of PEO chains at room
temperature in OL/TA, the PEO–TA matrix is thought to retain
the densified hydrogen bonding clusters with a much longer relaxation
time. Together with the improved long-range order, the micellar packing
network with the increased cross-linking density boosts both the elastic
and viscous responses. The mechanical responses would be further amplified
until the PEO–TA interaction efficiency is maximized during
the repeated dehydration–rehydration process of the PEO corona
over the temperature cycles.We performed molecular dynamics
(MD) simulations,[38−47] as outlined in Figure a, to understand the origin of redistribution of hydrogen bonds during
the temperature cycle. The random coil structures of PEO were sampled
using the scaled effective solvent method,[45] and two characteristic conformers were obtained and then included
in the three-dimensional (3D) periodic simulation cell. The PEO chains
were hydrated using the grand canonical Monte Carlo (GCMC) simulation
by setting the external pressure to be water vapor pressure at room
temperature (Figure S16). TA molecules
were sandwiched in between the PEO chains and the entire system was
equilibrated at 300 K. The obtained structure was considered to model
the PEO–TA interface before heating.
Figure 4
MD simulations of PEO–TA
interfaces. (a) Simulation procedure
to model the PEO–TA interface. PEO/TA and PEO/TAQ mimic the structures before and after the temperature cycle, respectively.
PEO: blue, water: orange, and TA: yellow. (b) Magnified views of interfacial
structures (upper panels) showing hydrogen bonds by dashed lines,
and the average number of hydrogen bonds between PEO–water,
TA–water, and PEO–TA (lower panel). (c) MD-simulated
stress–strain curve of PEO/TA and PEO/TAQ under
the z-direction axial elongation. The structures
at 0, 10, and 30% of strain are represented in insets.
MD simulations of PEO–TA
interfaces. (a) Simulation procedure
to model the PEO–TA interface. PEO/TA and PEO/TAQ mimic the structures before and after the temperature cycle, respectively.
PEO: blue, water: orange, and TA: yellow. (b) Magnified views of interfacial
structures (upper panels) showing hydrogen bonds by dashed lines,
and the average number of hydrogen bonds between PEO–water,
TA–water, and PEO–TA (lower panel). (c) MD-simulated
stress–strain curve of PEO/TA and PEO/TAQ under
the z-direction axial elongation. The structures
at 0, 10, and 30% of strain are represented in insets.To mimic dehydration upon heating, we randomly
evaporated water
molecules to completely dehydrate the system during MD simulation.
We then rehydrated the system using GCMC to model the PEO–TA
interface in PEO/TAQ (Figure S17). The number of hydrogen bonds between PEO with TA increased fourfold
in PEO/TAQ compared to PEO/TA (Figure b). Prior to dehydration, both PEO and TA
reside in their own hydration shells and form a relatively small number
of PEO–TA hydrogen bonds. The removal of water facilitates
hydrogen bonding of PEO with TA. Replacing PEO with water as a hydrogen
bonding partner for TA seems less favored during rehydration in the
densified structure, causing impeded reinclusion of water. We further
computationally investigated the mechanical properties of two models
by calculating stress–strain curves (Figure c). Young’s modulus of PEO/TAQ was found to be 1.5 times larger than that of PEO/TA, which
is ascribed to the densified interfacial hydrogen bonds and consistent
with the experimentally observed boost in the mechanical properties.
Adhesion Performances
As expected from the viscoelastic
properties, OL/TAs exhibited superior adhesion performance compared
with PEO/TA lacking the PLA block (Figure ). Detachment (tensile) strength of two poly(ethylene
terephthalate) (PET) films bonded using OL/TAs was measured (for the
test configurations, see Scheme S1). Compared
to 57.2 ± 5.0 kPa with PEO/TA, the detachment strength increased
with increasing the PLA fraction up to 95.1 ± 7.4 kPa in OL-H/TA
(Figure a). We observed
the same trend in T-peeling tests (Figure S18). The peeling force increased up to 30 N m–1 for
OL-H/TA.
Figure 5
Adhesive performances of OL/TAs. (a, b) Detachment strength (a)
and shear strength (b) of OL/TAs (n = 5). PET was
used as a substrate. A significant difference is indicated by *P < 0.05 and ***P < 0.0005 in OL/TAs
versus PEO/TA and *P < 0.05, **P < 0.005, and ***P < 0.0005 between OL-L/TA,
OL-M/TA, and OL-H/TA. N.S. indicates not significant. (c) Dependence
of the heating–cooling cycles on shear strength of OL-M/TA
on PET films (n = 5). Black circles indicate experimentally
determined data points. The inset photo shows the substrate failure
of a specimen after three heat cycles of the specimen (indicated by
the yellow arrowhead). Pink circles represent predicted values based
on the modulus trend assuming the absence of substrate failure. (d)
Photos showing dumbbells being lifted using the glass substrates bonded
with OL-M/TA after an increasing number of heat cycles (see Video S1). The bonding time was 20 min at RT.
Photos were taken after 15 s of lifting. The glass substrates are
marked by black dashed rectangles. Gray circles and red arrowheads
indicate undetached and detached adhesion areas, respectively.
Adhesive performances of OL/TAs. (a, b) Detachment strength (a)
and shear strength (b) of OL/TAs (n = 5). PET was
used as a substrate. A significant difference is indicated by *P < 0.05 and ***P < 0.0005 in OL/TAs
versus PEO/TA and *P < 0.05, **P < 0.005, and ***P < 0.0005 between OL-L/TA,
OL-M/TA, and OL-H/TA. N.S. indicates not significant. (c) Dependence
of the heating–cooling cycles on shear strength of OL-M/TA
on PET films (n = 5). Black circles indicate experimentally
determined data points. The inset photo shows the substrate failure
of a specimen after three heat cycles of the specimen (indicated by
the yellow arrowhead). Pink circles represent predicted values based
on the modulus trend assuming the absence of substrate failure. (d)
Photos showing dumbbells being lifted using the glass substrates bonded
with OL-M/TA after an increasing number of heat cycles (see Video S1). The bonding time was 20 min at RT.
Photos were taken after 15 s of lifting. The glass substrates are
marked by black dashed rectangles. Gray circles and red arrowheads
indicate undetached and detached adhesion areas, respectively.Consistent with the G′
increase, this is
indicative of the higher cohesive strength attained by the micellar
packing network.[48] Shear strength showed
a similar trend with even a larger increase: >100 kPa was achieved
with OL-H/TA, which is more than a threefold increase compared to
PEO/TA (Figure b).
In spite of the high cohesion strength, OL-M/TA and OL-H/TA retained
good tackiness provided by the wet PEO–TA matrix.We
further examined the shear strength of OL-M/TAQ as
a function of the temperature cycle number by heating and cooling
the bonded PET substrates (Figure c). Consistent with the enhancement in G′ and G″, a large increase in the
shear strength of ∼400 kPa was observed after the first cycle
followed by further augmentation over the four successive cycles.
Interestingly, the PET substrate itself was fractured after the third
cycle, that is, OL-M/TAQ glue can withstand much higher
shear strength than the measured values.Dumbbell lifting with
OL-M/TAQ-bonded glass substrates
indeed demonstrated further improved adhesion performance (Figure d and Video S1). The strong adhesion of OL/TA is surprising,
given that the adhesion strength between the adhesive with the substrate
is correlated to a higher G″ and typically
decreases with increasing cohesive strength.[48] The tradeoff relationship seems to be compromised to some extent
in the OL/TA system as both G′ and G″ increase with increasing PLA content and also
over the temperature cycles. Heating to high temperature close to
the gel-to-sol transition also increases fluidity (characterized by
higher tan δ = G″/G′) and ensures good contact to the substrate surface.[49] We note that such dynamic material properties
are one of the key characteristics of self-assembled materials that
can be modulated in response to external stimuli. We also noted that
the water loss during the temperature cycles was minimal (Figure S19).
Follicle-Free Hair Transplantation
We established a
suitable in vivo model to utilize the unique properties of the heat-treated
adhesion reinforcement of OL/TA gel: hair transplantation (Figure ). A conventional
hair transplantation involves a collection of follicles from patients’
tissue such as the back scalp, followed by insertion into a recipient
area (Figure a, left
section). Typically, a large piece of the scalp is resected and closed
by pulling the surrounding skin. This surgery is nonrepetitive (two
times at most) due to the limited donor skin area. Implanting more
hair is not possible although hair loss in the implanted area has
been commonly reported.
Figure 6
Application of OL/TA glue for hair transplantation
surgery. (a)
Schematic illustrations of the conventional hair transplantation procedure
(left box) and the new hair transplantation approach using OL/TA as
follicle-mimetic glue (right box). (b) Photographs of the remaining
hair strands 1 day after hair transplantation using as-prepared OL-M/TA
(top) and heat-treated OL-M/TAQ (bottom). A red arrowhead
indicates the remaining single strand in the OL-M/TA case. (c) Percentage
of remaining hair strands 1 day postoperation using OL-M/TA (blue)
and OL-M/TAQ (red). The error bar indicates standard deviations
(n = 3). (d) Photographs showing the adhesiveness
of OL-M/TAQ by pulling the transplanted hair strands 1
day after hair transplantation.
Application of OL/TA glue for hair transplantation
surgery. (a)
Schematic illustrations of the conventional hair transplantation procedure
(left box) and the new hair transplantation approach using OL/TA as
follicle-mimetic glue (right box). (b) Photographs of the remaining
hair strands 1 day after hair transplantation using as-prepared OL-M/TA
(top) and heat-treated OL-M/TAQ (bottom). A red arrowhead
indicates the remaining single strand in the OL-M/TA case. (c) Percentage
of remaining hair strands 1 day postoperation using OL-M/TA (blue)
and OL-M/TAQ (red). The error bar indicates standard deviations
(n = 3). (d) Photographs showing the adhesiveness
of OL-M/TAQ by pulling the transplanted hair strands 1
day after hair transplantation.Here, we introduce a new concept called follicle-free
hair transplantation
(Figure a, right section)
to overcome the aforementioned limitations. This follicle-free transplantation
uses tissue adhesives applied at the follicle side end of each hair.
We hypothesized that the glue could fix hair strands by connecting
between the hair surface and the subcutaneous tissue in the recipient
area, just like a hair follicle. The surgery does not require invasive
tissue resections and no follicle extraction procedures are needed.
It is repetitive due to the continuous supply of hair strands from
the donor’s haircut, and direct transplantation of the desired
length or color of hair should be also possible. With these possible
outcomes in mind, we demonstrate fixing hair strands as a proof of
concept.We transplanted 15 strands of human hair onto the dorsal
skin of
nude mice (n = 3) using OL-M/TA as a model adhesive
(Figures b,c and S20). OL-M/TAQ glue was prepared by
heating up to 75 °C to make it into a sol and it was applied
to the end of a hair strand. We lowered the heating temperature to
75 °C to avoid thermal damage to the tissue: the final temperature
of the glue was 40–50 °C at the moment of injection. Most
of the hair strands (76%) remained when OL-M/TAQ was used,
while only a few strands of the unheated OL-M/TA glue remained (11%).
This clearly shows the advantages of the OL/TAQ glue. Its
fluidity can be increased by heating to ease tissue penetration and
strengthen adhesion at room temperature. Implanting bare hair strands
without applying the glue left no hair strands (Figure S21).When a single hair strand transplanted
with the OL/TAQ glue was pulled using forceps, the strand
showed stable adhesion,
enough to raise the tissue (Figure c). Even the whole mouse body was lifted when pulling
with three hair strands, convincingly demonstrating strong adhesion
to tissue and thereby the excellent potential for hair transplantation.
We also note that the OL/TA gel exhibited minimal irritation to the
skin even when it was injected, supporting the compatibility of the
OL/TA as a tissue adhesive (Figure S22).
The OL/TA gel was also degraded within 14 days when it was injected
subcutaneously into hairless mice (Figure S23).
Conclusions
We developed a strong, biocompatible, and
biodegradable waterborne
glue by combining a block copolymer self-assembly with noncovalent
interactions. Our modular design combines all biocompatible components,
an amphiphilic diblock copolymer PEO-b-PLA, and TA
as a natural polyphenol capable of multiple hydrogen bonds. The block
copolymer micelles formed in water were bridged with TA to produce
a viscoelastic solid. While the sticky features of the hydrogen-bonded
network mediated by TA were retained, the hydrophobic PLA micellar
core reinforced the material, boosting cohesive strength.Utilizing
the temperature-dependent hydration behavior of the PEO
corona, the material was self-strengthened by iteratively applying
heating–cooling cycles. The adhesive became more fluidic as
it approached the gel-to-sol transition during heating, and further
hardened upon cooling by the more effective association in the network
structure.Noninvasive, sustainable, follicle-free hair transplantation
was
demonstrated with the heat-treated adhesive. Given the wide range
of material properties introduced in this study, the diverse synthetic
freedom of block copolymer systems, and the versatile self-assembling
morphologies accessible by block copolymers, this study opens a new
route to designing biomedical adhesives with dynamic, tunable, yet
improved performances for target applications.
Methods
Materials
Unless mentioned otherwise, the chemicals
were used as purchased. 1,8-Diaza-bicyclo[5.4.0]undec-7-ene (DBU),
tannic acid, and methoxy-terminated poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO-OH,
number average molar mass = 20 kg mol–1) were purchased
from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). d,l-Lactide
(LA) was kindly provided by Corbion Purac (Amsterdam, Netherlands)
and stored in a glovebox after recrystallization from ethyl acetate.
Benzoic acid was purchased from Daejung chemicals (Siheung, Korea).
HPLC-grade dichloromethane (DCM) was purchased from Burdick &
Jackson (Morristown, NJ) and purified using a solvent purification
system (C&T International, Suwon, Korea).
Synthesis of PEO-b-PLA
The synthesis
of OL-H is given as an example. A polymerization mixture containing
PEO-OH (2.000 g, 0.1000 mmol) and d,l-lactide (0.721
g, 10.0 mmol) in DCM (20 mL) was prepared in a glovebox. A stock solution
of DBU in DCM (7.6 wt %, 0.1 mL, 0.072 mmol) was added to the reaction
flask and stirred for 8 min at an ambient condition. Then, benzoic
acid (8.4 mg, 1.4 μmol) was added to stop the polymerization.
The product was purified by dialysis against methanol at an ambient
condition for 24 h. The resulting polymer was collected by evaporation
and dried under a vacuum at 40 °C overnight.The identical
protocol was used for the syntheses of OL-L and OL-M by varying the
amount of d,l-lactide.
Preparation of OL/TA
OL-M/TA is given as an example.
Aqueous solutions of OL-M and TA (50 wt %) were prepared by dissolving
OL-M (0.1999 g) and TA (0.3319 g, 0.1951 mmol, 5 mol % to the PEO
repeating units) in deionized water at 60 °C, respectively. The
TA solution was added to the OL-M solution, mixed with a spatula,
and then stirred overnight. The bright brown-colored mixture was settled
down to the bottom using a centrifuge Combi R514R (Hanil Inc., Daejeon,
Korea) with 5000 G for 15 min and separated from the supernatant.PEO/TA and other OL/TA hydrogels were prepared by following the protocol
described above.Additional details for material characterization,
computation,
adhesion test, and animal experiments are presented in the Supporting Information.